...
Appendix 8 defines a simplified referral profile. Section 7 Patient Referral defines a number of segments which allow more complex referral interactions but also have a significantly higher level of difficulty and use of this functionality will require negotiation with endpoints. For most purposes the simplified referral messages is recommended. Appendix 8 makes reference to this section for details.
...
The provider or facility identifier (in PRD-7) for the PRD marked with IR meaning "Intended Recipient" (in PRD-1) is used to address each instance of the message to an endpoint. Appendix 10 defines field mapping for addressing individual instances of a REF message to a provider or healthcare facility when using the Australian Profile for Provider Directory Services.
...
When sending a referral message to another provider, the intended recipient for the instance of that provider message must be identified. Only one provider PRD segment may be marked the intended recipient (IR) specified in the provider role field.
...
See section 7.6 Correcting referrals sent in error.
7.3.2.2 RF1-2 Referral priority (CE)
...
Components: <identifier (ST)> ^ <text (ST)> ^ <name of coding system (IS)> ^ <alternate identifier (ST)> ^ <alternate text (ST)> ^ <name of alternate coding system (IS)>
...
Referral messages may contain multiple display segments.
...
No delete mechanism exists for REF messages and if a report has been sent in error, then this should be stated in a correction to the original message with the same RF1-6 Originating Referral Identifier. Use Correction status in RF1-1 to indicate this.
...
† ALERT: Variance with HL7 2.4 International. Provider details are required in the PRD segment that is addressing a message (i.e. when PRD-1 includes an "Intended Recipient" - IR).
...
* UPIN must be used for Australian Medicare Provider numbers.
** NOI is not present in the most recently published table of HL7 0203 in HL7 v2.8.2, though it is has been accepted for publication in HL7 V2.9. The allocation of these identifiers is not always at the correct level of granularity and many organisations are not registered and alternative identifiers are often used. Pathology Labs are identified using the AUSNATA code with there NATA number.
...
-
17. @Brett Esler - Update links to all Standards on the HL7 Australia O&O WG page – Australian Diagnostics and Referral Messaging – Localisation of HL7 v2.4 Standard is still referenced as ‘Current Draft Standard’ as per https://confluence.hl7australia.com/display/OO/Current+Draft+Standards
-
32. @Kieron McGuire - Contact @Brett Esler to have pages for Profile URIs (FHIR Provider Directory) & update link for FHIR R4 Value sets to return user to correct version of HL7 Standard
-
33. @Jared Davison – create a checklist prior to final draft Standard being published
-
41. @David McKillop to provide presentation on ADHA Diagnostic Report FHIR Implementation Guide (20 – 30 mins) after 06 October meeting
43. @Jared Davison to review draft Standard to ensure no other reversions have occurred
45. @Jared Davison to prepare PDF of draft Standard
-
64. @Jared Davison tried to move A11.3 The Indication of Consent into draft Standard as an appendix, but has a lot of PCHR-specific content, not generic enough for O&O. Needs governance to review before next meeting
...
- 65. RACGP Standards with respect to safe reporting of pathology results and SPIA Standards distributed to all – if not yet received, please email @Vanessa Cameron.
- 66. Noted that final meeting will focus on reviewing all remaining comments to ascertain if draft Standard is ready for public comment
...